Abstract
Latent factors, such as general intelligence, depression and risk tolerance, are invoked in nearly all social science research where a construct is measured via aggregation of symptoms, question responses or other measurements. Because latent factors cannot be directly observed, they are inferred by fitting a specific model to empirical patterns of correlations among measured variables. A long-standing critique of latent factor theories is that the correlations used to infer latent factors can be produced by alternative data-generating mechanisms that do not include latent factors. This is referred to as the factor indeterminacy problem. Researchers have recently begun to overcome this problem by using information on the associations between individual genetic variants and measured variables. We review historical work on the factor indeterminacy problem and describe recent efforts in genomics to rigorously test the validity of latent factors, advancing the understanding of behavioural science constructs.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Steiger, J. H. Factor indeterminacy in the 1930’s and the 1970’s: some interesting parallels. Psychometrika 44, 157–167 (1979).
Steiger, J. H. Coming full circle in the history of factor indeterminancy. Multivar. Behav. Res. 31, 617–630 (1996).
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. in Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (eds John, O. P. et al.) 114–158 (Guilford Press, 2008).
Ashton, M. C. & Lee, K. Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11, 150–166 (2007).
Achenbach, T. M., Ivanova, M. Y., Rescorla, L. A., Turner, L. V. & Althoff, R. R. Internalizing/externalizing problems: review and recommendations for clinical and research applications. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 55, 647–656 (2016).
Spearman, C. 'General Intelligence,' objectively determined and measured. Am. J. Psychol. 15, 201–292 (1904).
Spearman, C. The measurement of intelligence. Nature 120, 577–578 (1927).
Cattell, R. B. Abilities: Their Structure, Growth, and Action Vol. 22, 583 (Houghton Mifflin, 1971).
Carroll, J. B. Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993).
Cramer, A. O. J. et al. Dimensions of normal personality as networks in search of equilibrium: you can’t like parties if you don’t like people. Eur. J. Pers. 26, 414–431 (2012).
Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., van der Maas, H. L. J. & Borsboom, D. Comorbidity: a network perspective. Behav. Brain Sci. 33, 137–150 (2010).
Fried, E. I. Problematic assumptions have slowed down depression research: why symptoms, not syndromes are the way forward. Front. Psychol. 6, 309 (2015).
Kotov, R. et al. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): a quantitative nosology based on consensus of evidence. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 17, 83–108 (2021).
Hunt, E. The role of intelligence in modern society. Am. Sci. 83, 356–368 (1995).
Thurstone, L. L. The Vectors of Mind: Multiple-Factor Analysis for the Isolation of Primary Traits xi, 274 (Univ. Chicago Press, 1935).
Spearman, C. Thurstone’s work re-worked. J. Educ. Psychol. 30, 1–16 (1939).
Beaujean, A. A. & Benson, N. F. The one and the many: enduring legacies of Spearman and Thurstone on intelligence test score interpretation. Appl. Meas. Educ. 32, 198–215 (2019).
Gould, S. J. The Mismeasure of Man (W. W. Norton, 1981).
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J. & van Heerden, J. The concept of validity. Psychol. Rev. 111, 1061–1071 (2004).
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J. & van Heerden, J. The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychol. Rev. 110, 203–219 (2003).
Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol. Bull. 52, 281–302 (1955).
Thomson, G. H. A hierarchy without a general factor. Br. J. Psychol. 8, 271–281 (1916).
Bartholomew, D. J., Deary, I. J. & Lawn, M. A new lease of life for Thomson’s bonds model of intelligence. Psychol. Rev. 116, 567–579 (2009).
Ceci, S. J. On Intelligence: A Biological Treatise on Intellectual Development (Prentice-Hall, 1990).
Kovacs, K. & Conway, A. R. A. Process overlap theory: a unified account of the general factor of intelligence. Psychol. Inq. 27, 151–177 (2016).
Van Der Maas, H. L. J. et al. A dynamical model of general intelligence: the positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychol. Rev. 113, 842–861 (2006).
Dickens, W. T. What is g? (The Brookings Institution working paper) (2007).
Christensen, A. P., Golino, H. & Silvia, P. J. A psychometric network perspective on the validity and validation of personality trait questionnaires. Eur. J. Pers. 34, 1095–1108 (2020).
Tomarken, A. J. & Waller, N. G. Potential problems with ‘well fitting’ models. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 112, 578–598 (2003).
Epskamp, S., Rhemtulla, M. & Borsboom, D. Generalized network psychometrics: combining network and latent variable models. Psychometrika 82, 904–927 (2017).
Carroll, J. B. in Human Cognitive Abilities in Theory and Practice (eds McArdle, J. J. & Woodcock, R. W.) 21–40 (Psychology Press, 1998).
Carroll, J. B. On methodology in the study of cognitive abilities. Multivar. Behav. Res. 30, 429–452 (1995).
Carroll, J. B. Individual Difference Relations in Psychometric and Experimental Cognitive Tasks (Defense Technical Information Center, 1980).
Detterman, D. K. Does “g” exist? Intelligence 6, 99–108 (1982).
Sternberg, R. J. The nature of mental abilities. Am. Psychol. 34, 214–230 (1979).
Kranzler, J. H. & Jensen, A. R. The nature of psychometric g: unitary process or a number of independent processes? Intelligence 15, 397–422 (1991).
Brody, N. Construct validation of the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test: comment and reanalysis. Intelligence 31, 319–329 (2003).
Salthouse, T. A. Attempted decomposition of age-related influences on two tests of reasoning. Psychol. Aging 16, 251–263 (2001).
Schubert, A.-L., Hagemann, D., Voss, A., Schankin, A. & Bergmann, K. Decomposing the relationship between mental speed and mental abilities. Intelligence 51, 28–46 (2015).
Colom, R., Jung, R. E. & Haier, R. J. Distributed brain sites for the g-factor of intelligence. NeuroImage 31, 1359–1365 (2006).
Takeuchi, H. et al. Global associations between regional gray matter volume and diverse complex cognitive functions: evidence from a large sample study. Sci. Rep. 7, 10014 (2017).
Madole, J. W. et al. Aging-sensitive networks within the human structural connectome are implicated in late-life cognitive declines. Biol. Psychiatry 89, 795–806 (2021).
Salthouse, T. A. et al. Breadth and age-dependency of relations between cortical thickness and cognition. Neurobiol. Aging 36, 3020–3028 (2015).
Abdellaoui, A., Yengo, L., Verweij, K. J. H. & Visscher, P. M. 15 years of GWAS discovery: realizing the promise. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 110, 179–194 (2023).
Veller, C. & Coop, G. Interpreting population and family-based genome-wide association studies in the presence of confounding. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.26.530052 (2023).
Sanderson, E. et al. Mendelian randomization. Nat. Rev. Methods Prim. 2, 6 (2022).
Boyle, E. A., Li, Y. I. & Pritchard, J. K. An expanded view of complex traits: from polygenic to omnigenic. Cell 169, 1177–1186 (2017).
Visscher, P. M. et al. 10 years of GWAS discovery: biology, function, and translation. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 101, 5–22 (2017).
Dudbridge, F. Polygenic epidemiology. Genet. Epidemiol. 40, 268–272 (2016).
Kendler, K. S. et al. Recent advances in the genetic epidemiology and molecular genetics of substance use disorders. Nat. Neurosci. 15, 181–189 (2012).
Brumpton, B. et al. Avoiding dynastic, assortative mating, and population stratification biases in Mendelian randomization through within-family analyses. Nat. Commun. 11, 3519 (2020).
Bulik-Sullivan, B. et al. An atlas of genetic correlations across human diseases and traits. Nat. Genet. 47, 1236–1241 (2015).
Grotzinger, A. D. et al. Genomic structural equation modelling provides insights into the multivariate genetic architecture of complex traits. Nat. Hum. Behav. 3, 513–525 (2019).
Franić, S. et al. Can genetics help psychometrics? Improving dimensionality assessment through genetic factor modeling. Psychol. Methods 18, 406–433 (2013).
Muthén, B. O. Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika 54, 557–585 (1989).
Tucker-Drob, E. M. How many pathways underlie socioeconomic differences in the development of cognition and achievement? Learn. Individ. Differ. 25, 12–20 (2013).
Caspi, A. et al. The p factor: one general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders? Clin. Psychol. Sci. 2, 119–137 (2014).
Lahey, B. B. et al. Is there a general factor of prevalent psychopathology during adulthood? J. Abnorm. Psychol. 121, 971–977 (2012).
Allegrini, A. G. et al. The p factor: genetic analyses support a general dimension of psychopathology in childhood and adolescence. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 61, 30–39 (2020).
Harden, K. P. et al. Genetic associations between executive functions and a general factor of psychopathology. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 59, 749–758 (2020).
Levin-Aspenson, H. F., Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Zimmerman, M. What is the general factor of psychopathology? Consistency of the p factor across samples. Assessment 28, 1035–1049 (2021).
Snyder, H. R., Young, J. F. & Hankin, B. L. Strong homotypic continuity in common psychopathology-, internalizing-, and externalizing-specific factors over time in adolescents. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 5, 98–110 (2017).
Lahey, B. B., Krueger, R. F., Rathouz, P. J., Waldman, I. D. & Zald, D. H. Validity and utility of the general factor of psychopathology. World Psychiatry 16, 142–144 (2017).
Watts, A. L., Poore, H. E. & Waldman, I. D. Riskier tests of the validity of the bifactor model of psychopathology. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 7, 1285–1303 (2019).
Grotzinger, A. D. et al. Genetic architecture of 11 major psychiatric disorders at biobehavioral, functional genomic and molecular genetic levels of analysis. Nat. Genet. 54, 548–559 (2022).
Cai, N. et al. Minimal phenotyping yields genome-wide association signals of low specificity for major depression. Nat. Genet. 52, 437–447 (2020).
Deary, I. Looking Down on Human Intelligence: From Psychometrics to the Brain (Oxford Univ. Press, 2000).
McGrew, K. S. CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence 37, 1–10 (2009).
de la Fuente, J., Davies, G., Grotzinger, A. D., Tucker-Drob, E. M. & Deary, I. J. A general dimension of genetic sharing across diverse cognitive traits inferred from molecular data. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 49–58 (2021).
Grotzinger, A. D., de la Fuente, J., Davies, G., Nivard, M. G. & Tucker-Drob, E. M. Transcriptome-wide and stratified genomic structural equation modeling identify neurobiological pathways shared across diverse cognitive traits. Nat. Commun. 13, 6280 (2022).
Marioni, R. E. et al. GWAS on family history of Alzheimer’s disease. Transl. Psychiatry 8, 99 (2018).
Achenbach, T. M. The classification of children’s psychiatric symptoms: a factor-analytic study. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 80, 1–37 (1966).
Karlsson Linnér, R. et al. Multivariate analysis of 1.5 million people identifies genetic associations with traits related to self-regulation and addiction. Nat. Neurosci. 24, 1367–1376 (2021).
Hart, A. B. & Kranzler, H. R. Alcohol dependence genetics: lessons learned from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and post-GWAS analyses. Alcohol Clin. Exp. Res. 39, 1312–1327 (2015).
Sehnal, D. et al. Mol* Viewer: modern web app for 3D visualization and analysis of large biomolecular structures. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, W431–W437 (2021).
Torres-Ocampo, A. P. et al. Characterization of CaMKIIα holoenzyme stability. Protein Sci. 29, 1524–1534 (2020).
Ostermeier, C. & Brunger, A. T. Structural basis of Rab effector specificity: crystal structure of the small G protein Rab3A complexed with the effector domain of rabphilin-3A. Cell 96, 363–374 (1999).
Dong, Y. et al. Closed-state inactivation and pore-blocker modulation mechanisms of human CaV2.2. Cell Rep. 37, 109931 (2021).
Laird, N. M. & Lange, C. in The Fundamentals of Modern Statistical Genetics. Statistics for Biology and Health, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7338-2_1 (Springer, 2011)
Acknowledgements
We thank M. Rhemtulla (University of California Davis), B. Domingue (Stanford University), K. Kanopka (New York University), S. Trejo (Princeton University), D. Londono-Correa (University of Texas at Austin) and C. Williams (University of Texas at Austin) for their invaluable feedback on earlier versions of this work. This research was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants R01MH120219 and RF1AG073593. E.M.T.-D. is a member of the Population Research Center and Center on Aging and Population Sciences at the University of Texas at Austin, which are supported by NIH grants P2CHD042849 and P30AG066614, respectively.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Human Behaviour thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Figs. 1–4, Methods and Results.
Supplementary Tables
Supplementary Tables 1–5 with model solutions and model fit statistics.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Clapp Sullivan, M.L., Schwaba, T., Harden, K.P. et al. Beyond the factor indeterminacy problem using genome-wide association data. Nat Hum Behav 8, 205–218 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01789-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01789-1
This article is cited by
-
Characterizing the phenotypic and genetic structure of psychopathology in UK Biobank
Nature Mental Health (2024)